About a week and a half, I was prepared to write a blog post celebrating Auburn's star quarterback Cam Newton, the Heisman Trophy frontrunner, for passing up a question on the possibility of skipping his senior season to enter the NFL Draft. Newton declared that it would be "selfish" to think about individual awards or the NFL in a season where Auburn is contending for a national championship. The fact that the best player in college football would so candidly reject a question about the NFL seemed refreshing compared to recent actions of Brett Favre and Randy Moss.
Only a few days later, both ESPN and The New York Times reported of a story that last year as a junior college player, Newton was being shopped around to various colleges by a middle man. In the past week, their has been several alleged reports which would not render Newton ineligible, but would damage his credibility in the eyes of Heisman voters. The latest report, from ESPN last night, alleges that Newton decided on Auburn from tons of scholarship offers, because the money "was too much" to pass up. Alleged reports have indicated that Newton or his father set up a "pay-to-play" plan in which Newton would have been paid by boosters to attend Auburn. For the most part, Auburn has neither confirmed or denied any or the reports and the school has simply stressed the fact that Newton remains eligible to play.
Newton's lofty performance this season, coupled with the fact that he is still eligible to play, has left him as the favorite to win the Heisman. Newton's on-field performance is clearly deserving of the award, however, it would be hard for me to consider him a Heisman winner if the allegations turn out true. Many sportswriters, including Sports Illustrated's Michael Rosenberg acknowledge that "pay to play" plans and under the table payments have been a dirty staple in college football history, and for that it would be a mistake to victimize Newton. In some ways, yes, it is wrong to single out Newton. However, it is a greater mistake to look the other way and allow these under the table payments to continue. You cannot justify something in 2010, based on an issue that has been largely ignored.
"Because its always been this way," simply isn't a good enough answer anymore. More than ever, there is scrutiny inside college sports. With budgets of tens of millions of dollars, College Athletic Departments are being held accountable like corporations. Just like corporations have a moral responsibility, so do athletic departments and their representatives (coaches, staff, and players). It is time for the appropriate parties to live up to that responsibility.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete